Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive111

This is an archive page, last updated 1 April 2012. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <167>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <178>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, <340>, <341>, <342>, <343>, <344>, <345>, <346>

, (new)(back)

Tony Sidaway's view of CP's breakdown...

... can be found here. It links the downtime of CP to the publication of the hit-list. On the talk page of said hit-list, Tony Sidaway made the case that the list didn't originate with a vandal. For your pleasure, I've preserved the talk site:

---

Alright, first off, Begich is from Alaska. I've fixed that. But this article needs to die very quickly. It reads like a hit list, in all honesty. Everything we say is true, I believe, but this could look very bad... --DReynolds 22:42, 21 January 2009 (EST)

It's a very relevant article, especially when Senate appointments by governors have been such a big issue (although not in this context) this past election. On the contrary, we should also have a corresponding list here or in its own article for Republican senators in states with Democratic governors. --Fairfieldrr 09:40, 24 January 2009 (EST)

I must have had decaf this morning. Also, article edited to sound less damning. --Fairfieldrr 11:29, 24 January 2009 (EST)

Agreed

Terrible idea. Why is Johnny Isakson, who is a Republican, listed?

This "Article" Was The Work Of An Internet Parodist/Vandal

Conservapedia in no way sanctioned it, and cannot, because of the wiki format, completely stop the work of political terrorists, who are intent upon and dedicated to mocking our conservative, Christian-friendly encyclopedia.

Thank you. --₮K_Admin^{/Talk Here} 16:36, 24 January 2009 (EST)

The article was created by User:QWest. I have examined his contributions and, on the face of it, he seems to be for real.

• Qwest's first contribution, on Talk:Main_Page, was shortly after the selection of Palin as Vice Presidential candidate. He said he had problems with that. "Women are supposed to be subordinate to men, how can I take one seriously as a Vice President?" This was taken by someone as parody, but he asserted that it was his honest opinion, and told another user: "I'm sorry you're in denial about the fact that women are rarely capable leaders."

• On 7 September, he came up with the Obama "My Muslim faith" slip, to which Conservapedia still refers in one or two of its articles.

• He later edit warred to put "Barack Obama" into a list of prominent Muslims in the "Islam" article.

• He contributed "Abstinence only sex education doesn't work" to "Liberal Myths About Education" (it's still there).

• He started the "Obama and Socialism" section to the Barack Obama article.

• He contributed "The flagellum" (about the bacterial flagellum), Consciousness , symbiosis and the bat to "Counterexamples to evolution".

I don't believe these were acts of parody. I think he meant them sincerely. --TonySidaway 17:02, 24 January 2009 (EST)

---

l'arron^{sicut fur in nocte} 07:15, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Obviously Tony Sidaway is not fully acquainted with what goes on at CP. QWest just happens to be the name of an ISP and a history of "good edits" is just what you need to plant wikiweeds. TK is being disingenuous and attempting some damage limitation. P/Vs post lots of similar stuff and CP is quite happy to use it if they feel it supports their PoV (c.f. Bugler). Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 07:36, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Hmmmm. Fascinating theory, but not a terribly convincing one in my eyes. To think that they forcibly nuked a full week of edits (and their server) just to make it look like one article never existed is overkill even for CP. They could have just nuked the article (followed by a recreation with TK's damage control note), claiming that it was the work of a parodist. If it was true, it would be the most notable Pyrrhic victory by CP to date. --Sid 07:56, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Yes. But unfortuantaly whenever CP tries to use a 'surgical strike' to destroy a single page they end up destroying the entire wiki, surrounding areas, UN headquarters, John Simpson, etc. Say surgical strike in D Rumsfeld accent and it will all become clear. StarFish 08:02, 27 January 2009 (EST)

The hit-list wasn't the most absurd or despicable thing CP produced - but it's one of the few items which made the news, at least a few of them ;-)

I suppose that Ma Phillys has some eager eagles to watch google news - and they will find this:

• Conservapedia at news.google.com

So, nothing about the world greatest class on American history or the youngest world in the history of the universe, but a hit-list! Maybe, this triggered some action: I've this picture in mind of a couple of young interns forced to wade through the articles on CP, torn between laughter and dismay... l'arron^{sicut fur in nocte} 08:20, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I did assume at first that the outage was just a scheduled dbms upgrade that failed. Similar things used to happen in Wikipedia in the early days when they didn't have a full time professional systems team. Even comparatively recently, in 2006, I've found the Japanese Wikipedia in a complete muddle due to a botched upgrade. But the coincidence of the Conservapedia outage, and the date of the backup from which Conservapedia is now working, have slowly persuaded me that it probably has something to do with the "hit list" article.

Conservapedia can afford to be pretty relaxed about this. An outage of a few days is okay as long as they can continue to serve up the pages (so that their google ranking doesn't slip as the spiders get 404s or other errors). Unlike Wikipedia they have a closed membership with a very small inner core of editors who will wait as long as it takes. They have nowhere else to go, as far as I'm aware. The only real down side is that Schlafly will have to find another way of contacting his American History students.

Thanks for preserving my talk page comments. As I remarked later on my blog, the fact that QWest wasn't immediately blocked, and TK made no overt effort to contact him, seems suspicious if TK really does believe the article was created as parody. I looked at the first revision and it's very similar to the version shown in a screenshot on Wonkette's blog posting. But yes, he could be a deep troll. So could they all,for that matter (except Ed Poor whom I know from Wikipedia, and who is all too real). Poor Andy. --Tony Sidaway 10:28, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Isn't TK the one who likes off-wiki communication and insists on email/IM for some things? I'm just not sure we can assume that nothing has been discussed simply because it's not on CP. Worm ^{(t | c)} 10:48, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Hey Tony. I'm not sure if you'll read this or if it even matters if you do but TK himself is, as you say, "a deep troll" and something of a parodist (or at least his participation in CP is not wholly sincere). He has had one visible and public crash and burn at CP and his reinstatement in their ranks is something of a mystery to us. We here at RW have come to expect every word he types to be indistinguishable from bovine excrement. He has in the past used multiple channels of communication to sow confusion and dissent between and among "legitimate" CP editors, parodists, and legitimate RW editors alike. He is not of super villain caliber but he definitely is not playing the same game rest of us are playing. Have fun! ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 11:57, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I have to side with those who think the timing is a coincidence. Andy tried to use computers and the results were disastrous. I think to read too much into the "hit list" appearance is to embrace the post hoc fallacy. This wouldn't be the biggest embarrassment CP has ever encountered, and it's not like the article actively encouraged assassinating senators. It would have been very easy to delete it, rather than crashing the entire site. As for whether or not the original author was a parodist, well, there's no way of knowing, and it doesn't matter. The parodists and the earnest editors are indistinguishable, and even if it was the work of a parodist, the fact that his edits have long been endorsed and approved of shows it wasn't simply a case of unobserved vandalism. In fact, vandalism at CP is almost never unobserved, as the ratio of unblocked, active editors to sysops and semi-sysops allows almost every non-sysop edit to be checked. Vandalism generally only prospers if it cannot be recognized as vandalism, as would be the case here. The fact that they base what is or is not vandalism on the editor rather than the content shows just how fucked up the place is. DickTurpis 13:18, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Surely the simplest explanation is: they broke something over there (exactly how doesn't matter), it's taking time to fix, and so Andy threw a recentish backup of the database onto another server, thus enabling homeskollars the world over to continue to access untainted-by-liberals-information in the meantime. Why invent conspiracy stories when there's a simple alternative? alt 13:27, 27 January 2009 (EST)

That does satisfy both wp:Occam's razor and Hanlon's_razor - the incompetence of some install messed it up. Or as the Bits have said - "Cock-up before conspiracy." Still, the list hitting the news and the revert to backup... and the name change gets me. If it was just the server down, that would be one thing. But it was server down and name change as if he wanted the name conservapedia itself to be removed from one's memory and instead start "fresh" with conservativeencyclopedia that didn't have the hit list taint. I'll go with incompetence, but there's still that notion at the back of my mind. I still smirk at the idea of Kenny looking at google and watching his page rank fall. So, here's the question - how long before it comes back up, will it be from backup or where it was before, what name, isp will it resurface on? This should give a better idea if it was intentional super deep burn or incontinent admins. --Shagie 14:21, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I've updated my blog entry. I think this was wild speculation on my part and I've withdrawn it. --Tony Sidaway 19:21, 27 January 2009 (EST)

"[I]t is far easier for a conservative to detect conservative parody than for a liberal to do so, and vice-versa." - TK, in the comments on Tony's blog. I'm sure most of us here would disagree with him on this, given how most of us here speculated that Bugler was a parodist, even while he was getting plaudits from most established CP users, including Andy himself. Dreaded Walrus 19:40, 27 January 2009 (EST)

OpenDNS

I'm getting the following OpenDNS error now.

Hmm, www.conservapedia.com isn't loading right now.

The computers that run www.conservapedia.com are having some trouble. Usually this is just a temporary problem, so you might want to try again in a few minutes.

I'm not sure if this means they've cocked up they're DNS records in which case things are going from bad to worse, or if it's just that they're in the process of moving back to the main domain. Technical Problems are fun - when I don't have to fix them. StarFish 10:32, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I'm still getting www.consevativeencyclopedia etc. Love² 10:44, 27 January 2009 (EST)

It's still loading fine for me, with a temporary redirect to www.conservativeencyclopedia.com/wiki . --Tony Sidaway 10:45, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I guess it will depend on who your ISP is. But for sure they have f'ed up their DNS> It just gets beter and beter. This is what I'm seeing for any CP page now. I guess if I went to www.conservativeencyclopedia.com/wiki directly that would work, but all google searches etc give the following for me. StarFish 10:54, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Google led to www.consevativeencyclopedia. Must be your ISP. :) Love² 10:59, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Wouldn't you think that they'd put a notice on the front page about their problems, for all those users who aren't sysops who presumably know what the hell is going on via email or IM? It's kind of bizarre that they'd let the side be dead for two days and still not say a work about it. --JeevesMkII 11:04, 27 January 2009 (EST)

(EC) DNS takes time to replicate and different ISPs replicate the data at different speeds / times. The source server currently contains no valid DNS data (anyone can check this using a dns lookup). So blank DNS data will get to you eventually (12 hours or so max) at which point the forward will fail and you will see the OpenDNS thing. That's my understanding anyway. Anyone else want to back me up (or shoot me down)? I don't want to say too much here because I don't want to help them with their technical problems! StarFish 11:04, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Nah, it's just those morons are moving their DNS arrangements to their own server (with no backup secondary or tertiary ns, facepalm.) The new whois for conservapedia says ns1.conservapedia.com and ns2.conservapedia.com (The same host, also the same host as the HTTP is on.) --JeevesMkII 11:28, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Does anyone know the IP for CP? I have the FF extension which shows it in the status bar but forgot to make a note. (Dang!) Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 11:30, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Open terminal, type ping conservapedia.com. --JeevesMkII 11:32, 27 January 2009 (EST)

@Jeeves: There's no way they'd put up a message like that. It would be tantamount to admitting they made a mistake. As has been previously noted, when the whole thing is over, it will never be mentioned again, and asking about it will probably lead to banhammering. Z3ro^h3ros 11:38, 27 January 2009 (EST)

So it seems apparent that RW is pretty boring without CP around...

...admit it. Without them, we're nothing. Karajou, you complete me. Ed, I'm not sure I can go on without you. Andy, you had me at "Godspeed." Please come back soon. TheoryOfPractice 12:49, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Just wait for CUR to come back online -- Nx ^talk 12:56, 27 January 2009 (EST)

And if CP stays down, where are we going to find a site just as nutty and so thoroughly hypocritical to tear a few arseholes into? ENorman 13:02, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I'd recommend Freerepublic, but then we run into a numbers problem. Hactar 13:09, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I'm coming down hard man, I'm getting the chills. The only thing that sustains me is the quote generator

"Anonymous User" (what a ridiculous user name!), you ramble on a way not worth responding to. I've responded to your concerns and answered your questions and based on your postings, I bet you don't spend even 5% of your spare time reading or analyzing the Bible, so admit it, you're hearing this for the first time. Open your mind and admit that Conservapedia reduces abortion. As I've said before, you'd never put gasoline in your tank if it were full, yet you do want government controls to stop non-existent global warming. Your comment is like asking if I have any evidence that 2+3=5! --aschlafly 03:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

AH GOD YES! --GTac 13:16, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I think it has to be Freep, or Human Events, or American Thinker, or Comfort Food (Ray Comfort's blog)... there's a lot of bad politics & woo out there.-Diadochus 13:18, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Frankly, if CP is gone then everybody wins. I'll sacrifice the entertainment that CP provides for the knowledge that Andy's poisonous ideas no longer have a broad audience. Stile4aly 13:19, 27 January 2009 (EST)

They have a broad audience? You mean, like the 12 editors who haven't been banned?EternalCritic 13:30, 27 January 2009 (EST)

No, no. They have an audience of broads. - Poor Excuse 00:17, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Any audience outside Andy's own head is too broad. Poe's Law cuts both ways. Although some parodists are mistaken for true believers, some true believers are mistaken for parodists as well. Too many people actually believe some of the stuff Andy talks about, most tragically his students. I truly hope that whatever Andy has done to bugger up CP is permanent and irreversible and that he won't have the inclination to restart this clusterfuck of a project. Let him retire to his sinecure with JPANDS muttering about how Obama is a Muslim and Liberals are deceitful. Stile4aly 15:54, 27 January 2009 (EST)

WorldNetDaily [1] has good giggle-value as well; the entire site exhibits a Ken-style obsession with homosexuality. ListenerX^TalkerX 13:32, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Why me Andy? WHY??? ;_; EddyP 13:44, 27 January 2009 (EST)

"Anonymous User" (what a ridiculous user name!), you ramble on a way not worth responding to. I've responded to your concerns and answered your questions and based on your postings, I bet you don't spend even 5% of your spare time reading or analyzing the Bible, so admit it, you're hearing this for the first time. Open your mind and admit that Conservapedia reduces abortion. As I've said before, you'd never put gasoline in your tank if it were full, yet you do want government controls to stop non-existent global warming. Your comment is like asking if I have any evidence that 2+3=5! --aschlafly 03:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Ahhh, it's good for a quick fix. EddyP 13:47, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Come back, CP! Without you, I'll need to go back to working or (more likely) find some other website to waste time on. Please spare me this fate. Z3ro^talk 14:23, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Conservapedia isn't the beginning and end of the world! There's plenty of other insane things out there. Let's just live a little and enjoy the time off! ArmondikoV^sshole 14:36, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I know, but it's so easy, with so much crazy in one place. Plus, RW kinda dies without it, which also sucks. Z3ro^talk 15:33, 27 January 2009 (EST)

At least there's still Faux News. ~Ttony21^{(talk, contribs)} 14:45, 27 January 2009 (EST)

(undent) The quote generator snippets above just gave me a lovely vision of a flash-based widget called "The Magic Wingnut", which starts in an upright position like a pair of Mickey Mouse ears, then is turned upside down to reveal a random CP-ism. Wish I had the programming chops to do it, but I don't, so I'm releasing the suggestion into the wild. --SpinyNorman 16:29, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Question

When typing conservapedia.com, is anyone else getting redirect to conservativenecyclopedia.com? Did Andy fuck up and not renew his lease on the domain name and lose it or something? DickTurpis 12:58, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Ummm, have you been out of town or something? Discussed in detail above. Short answer: it's borken..TheoryOfPractice 13:04, 27 January 2009 (EST)

(EC) according to whois:

Registered through: EasyDomain.com
Domain Name: CONSERVAPEDIA.COM
     Created on: 28-Aug-06
     Expires on: 28-Aug-15
     Last Updated on: 27-Jan-09

so no, it's still his -- Nx ^talk 13:08, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I've been checking out easydomain and their hosting servers in the hope of finding some promiscuous sites being hosted on the same server (remember, some of wikipedia's content uses servers which are also used by a company that makes NUDITY websites ZOMG EVUL!!!!), but alas I can't find much. Someone want to sign up through easydomain and make a skin site just to piss off Andy? --GTac 13:13, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I know it's been borken, but until now I was still at east getting directed to conservapedia when searching for it, albeit it to an error page or jumbled nonsense. Getting directed to a different site entirely (one evidently unconnected to CP at all) is a new development on my end. Under what circumstances does that happen? Certainly I've tried to access sites that were down for whatever reason, but I recall only ever getting the site's error message or the generic firefox message. I don't think I've ever tried going to Amazon.com and instead being sent to "Amazonianbooks.com" or something. DickTurpis 13:24, 27 January 2009 (EST)

As far as I understand, conservapedia.com started redirecting to the other url sometime yesterday--first via a page that told you about the redirect, and then directly...but it seems as if, for some reason i can't begin to comprehend, different people have been having different results/experiences...TheoryOfPractice 13:32, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Now, the redirect is broken, and conservativeencyclopedia.com leads to a placeholder for the domain name provider: "This page is parked free, courtesy of EasyDomain.com". Why would that happen? They ran out of bandwidth last night. Is this related? --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 16:08, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Is anyone connected enough....

...to e-mail Ed or someone else and find out what's going on? TheoryOfPractice 16:16, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Oh, we all know what's going on. The Assfly is attempting to fix his wiki, and epically failing at it. About now he's probably realised that PERHAPS, just perhaps it isn't a terribly brilliant idea for the fucking nameservers for a domain be under the same fucking domain name as the one to be resolved. Morons. Seriously, the brilliance of making people resolve ns1.conservapedia.com to resolve conservapedia.com. It boggles the mind. --JeevesMkII 16:23, 27 January 2009 (EST)

You could pester Ed Poor at Wikipedia. His page says he doesn't discuss non-WP stuff but he might make an exception in this case. Don't forget to stroke his ego while you're there and he may be amenable. Yours truly^{Dear Sir} 16:26, 27 January 2009 (EST)

It's all pretty simple, really

1. It starts with a crash of some sort at the hosting site (could be hardware, could be massive bandwidth spike?) 2. Andy decides he might as well move the site to a new server, perhaps at his house, since he was thinking of doing it anyway 3. He posts the last backup he had at another domain name that he also owns, at the old host site (or rather, the host does it) 4. All the missing server stuff is due to him trying to get the DNS info set up to point to the new server 5. Because he doesn't really know what he's doing, what took Trent hours is taking him days 6. CP will be back 7. the week of 1/19 - 1/26 is forever lost due to the backup not being recent 8. One caveat on #6 is: if for some reason whoever pays his salary(s) got really miffed over the Wonkette piece and they are leaning on him hard, CP might never be the same.

But really, I think we'll just see it back up later this week, missing a week of edits & c. He may even be waiting to propagate the DNS info until after he gets the whole thing running right again (remember, that took us several days of running "live with bugs")

The only thing I can't "explain" is why the temporary holder site (CE) is down as well - unless perhaps he pooched all the DNS info for domains he owns by accident.

The timing is just a wonderful coincidence, with the backup being the day before the inauguration, and before the "hit list" article was created. ħuman 16:19, 27 January 2009 (EST)

please explain DNS to me like I'm a six-year-old....TheoryOfPractice 16:23, 27 January 2009 (EST)

It's the magic stuff that lets websites play. And there's a Santa Claus. Yours truly^{Dear Sir} 16:31, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Computers navigate around to each other on the internet using a numerical address, that is how they know who everyone is. This numerical address is the IP. To access a website you have to know its IP address. But as you know we goto websites based on words like "conservapedia.com." This is accomplished by a domain name server, the DNS, which stores the relationship between name and IP address. So when I type "conservapedia.com" the browser checks the DNS and asks "what IP address should I goto for the name conservapedia.com". As Jeeves pointed out there are a host of problems associated with making your DNS server the same domain as your website. tmtoulouse 16:47, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Maybe he pulled the CE site when he realised using a week-old version looked suspicious & was causing further speculation about the (probably non-existent) cover-up. Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 16:28, 27 January 2009 (EST)

(EC) I would guess that he simply pulled the plug on it because the restored site is back up but has not rippled though the DNS yet.

@ToP - DNS or domain name servers are the lookup tables which link "friendly" domain names to BoNs and the subdirectories where a site is hosted. Many ISPs have their own local versions but it takes some time for changes to be promulgated to all the other servers. If you know the IP you can go to the site directly without waiting for a DNS update. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 16:50, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Thanks, Trent. Thanks Ghengis...Fuck you, Insert name here.TheoryOfPractice 16:51, 27 January 2009 (EST)

"please explain DNS to me like I'm a six-year-old" Isn't that what Insert Name Here did? You should be more specific what you ask for. - User $\pi$ 17:00, 27 January 2009 (EST)

You, my numerical friend, have obviously not dealt with many six-year-olds. Kids aren't idiots. and they know bullshit when they hear it. TheoryOfPractice 17:03, 27 January 2009 (EST)

How things work - DNS

You've got a name of something. Lets say it is "www.google.com". Your computer first asks its store of names "do I know what the ip address of this is?" On a unix based system, this local store is in /etc/hosts. On a PC, it is c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts or something similar. Failing finding the ip address there, the computer then checks its local cache for dns of things it has looked up recently. At this point, the computer still doesn't know the ip address so it goes out to its list of name servers it knows - on unix this is found in /etc/resolv.conf. The computer then asks the name servers listed if they know of the ip address for the name. The first thing the name server does it checks its local cache of names it has found recently. Failing that, it goes and asks the name servers it knows of. The name servers are in a hierarchy and eventually propogate up to the root level name servers.

When a dns server finds out the answer for a name lookup, part of the answer includes a serial number and a TTL (time to live). If the serial number is less than the serial number you have last found, the data is older and it is ignored. If the request comes in and it is still within the TTL of when the server last got data for the name, that cached information is returned.

What often happens is a name is looked up for my name server now and I get an answer of, lets say 1 hour TTL and 1.2.3.4 for the ip address. Then Andy goes and changes it to point to 5.6.7.8 5 minutes later. My name server still has 55 minutes before it goes and looks for new data. But if you haven't gotten data for it and you look 5 minutes after Andy changes something, you get 5.6.7.8 while I am still looking at 1.2.3.4. In another 55 minutes my dns server will say "oh, this data is old" and go look for new data and pick up the change to 5.6.7.8.

--Shagie 17:57, 27 January 2009 (EST)

wouldn't it be deliciously ironic....

.... if the FBI was investigating Conservapedia for the hit list, and that's why they've gone off-line? MDB 17:34, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Delicious, sure, but totally unlikely. This has administration fuckup written all over it. --JeevesMkII 17:36, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Yeah, but a bear can dream, can't he? MDB 17:39, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Actually the most delicious part of this is what it is doing to Ken. Do you realise we're only two places from beating his evolution article on yahoo search? Couple more days of this and a visit or two from that Yahoo bot and we'll be able to really rub his nose in one of his "competitive" searches. --JeevesMkII 17:40, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Poor Ken, back to link farming! tmtoulouse 18:05, 27 January 2009 (EST)

My own fantasy is that a bunch of people in black uniforms broke into Andy's mom's basement:

"Andrew L. Schlafly, we're from the secret service. Unplug that server. We're confiscating it and taking it downtown. And the gerbils in their cage, too. You're under arrest for making threats against members of congress. This is no joke."

Possible, though not likely.

Gauss 17:55, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Don't forget the threat to send him to Gitmo as a terrorist. Of course, I'm sure Andy wouldn't mind that in the least, since he's undoubtedly in the crowd that thinks its a tropical vacation paradise. MDB 18:11, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I don't seriously think that the "hit list" has anything to do with all this. Andy probably just borked things while trying to move/upgrade the server and that's it.

Something I'm more afraid of, is that Andy's interest in it is probably fading while it's offline. Editing CP seems to have drug-like effects on him, and perhaps now that he's been without his kicks for a few days, he's becoming clean? If he just takes a few steps back, he'll realize that he's wasting his life on the highway to failure.

In other words; Andy, if you are reading this - please, hang in there! Don't give up, don't let Conservapedia die! If you need technical support, please contact me. I'm an experienced web master and I'm sure I can help you get your server up and running in no time. Just STAY AWAY from the light! Etc 18:46, 27 January 2009 (EST)

While I agree with Jeeves, it is entirely possible that "someone" at least had to carefully look into that hit list to make sure it was just innocent stupidity. ħuman 19:00, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Wikiforkids

Just wanted to remind you about this, a Wikipedia for kids, I thought some of our newfound free time could be spent doing something productive. We could also invite the sane editors at CP to take away whatever labor force they still have. There I go thinking about CP's downfall again. NightFlare 18:12, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Anyone want to guess...

When in five or six days time, they get some semblance of a wiki back on t'internet, what domain name they'll end up using? I'm hazarding a guess that conservativeencyclopedia.com is just the kind of dumb arse name that really appeals to the Assfly. The doubled vowel that makes it a real pain to type is just up his street. I bet he thinks it makes them seem professional. Also, anyone want a sweepstake on when they get it all fixed? I'm betting on Saturday, around 2PM UTC. --JeevesMkII 18:14, 27 January 2009 (EST)

That double vowel is pretty stupid. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistor^{is Rodney McKay} 18:16, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Yesterday, the first time I saw conservativeencyclopedia.com, out of the corner of my eye I thought it read "conservativeteenencyclopedia" with all those e's and n's. And then I thought of Ed Poor and shuddered....TheoryOfPractice 18:17, 27 January 2009 (EST)

How do we know that the Assfly isn't really a bored teenager? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistor^{is Rodney McKay} 18:18, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Last whois I ran shows a DNS other than conservapedia.com so that is something. Though nslookup is still returning servfail and NXDOMAIN so things are right fucked up. I am still thinking this will be resolved before the weekend, and we will be back on conservapedia.com.....too much name recognition to abandon it. tmtoulouse 18:19, 27 January 2009 (EST)

DNS is resolving but we are getting the default apache page on the site it looks like. It is progress though. tmtoulouse 18:34, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Didn't he register a handful of names similar to CP all at the same time? I think he just pulled one out of dormancy to "float" the backed up copy on. ħuman 19:02, 27 January 2009 (EST)

He has a whole bunch of names registered, though you have to pay to find them out on that site. Trial and error shows he has andyschlafly.com and aschlafly.com, and presumably other ones related to/misspellings of the two we've seen so far. alt 19:11, 27 January 2009 (EST)

But does he have assfly.com?Hactar 11:47, 28 January 2009 (EST)

If memory serves, there's one beginning with "R" as well.  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 11:52, 28 January 2009 (EST)

it's back...

Kinda...and Andy's already improvulating his history course...TheoryOfPractice 18:48, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Weird. "We're upgrading to a new server" during which time they lost a weeks worth of edits and were down for the better part of three days, and they don't even mention it. --JeevesMkII 18:50, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Should anyone tell them their logo isn't showing up? ħuman 19:05, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Let him figure it out himself. We might get 'trusworthy' again. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistor^{is Rodney McKay} 19:10, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Andy gets the WIGO train stoked up right from the start. Andy you are so kind to us:

The dates given below are imprecise, and the homework encourages you to improve on them:

• Creation of Adam and Eve 3700-4004 B.C.
• Flood perhaps 3300 B.C.
• Tower of Babel perhaps 2500 B.C.

His second edit was to add the "perhaps"es... ħuman 19:13, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Of course he's only 95% certain those are correct dates -- Nx ^talk 19:16, 27 January 2009 (EST)

LOL: CPWebmaster proudly announces the result of a week's hard work!! Etc 19:17, 27 January 2009 (EST)

How unfortunate. I created an account there a couple of days ago with good intentions and all my hard work (and my username) has vanished. Ah well, perhaps this is a sign I should stay away from teh Conservative Encyclopedia? MIP has actually signed in - 20:39, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Broken their links

For me, at least, all CP addresses now require a "/wiki" in the URL - example, http://www.conservapedia.com/wiki/Special:RecentChanges. Well, good news everyone! That means ALL INCOMING LINKS TO THE SITE ARE NOW BROKEN. So long, Ken's swap-linking deals!-Diadochus 20:26, 27 January 2009 (EST)

This is a bad sign -- Nx ^talk 20:29, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I get that too. Unless they fix it soon, their sesrch engine rankings (which for some subjects such as atheism are quite respectable) will suffer. --Tony Sidaway 20:55, 27 January 2009 (EST)

AAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAAHA. They're trying to manually fix everything?!?!? Search engine WIN.-Diadochus 21:05, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I saw that CPW edit, too. Might have just done it to keep the main page intact until the urls are fixed, though. ħuman 21:53, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Frak! They fixed it.-Diadochus 00:35, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Yeach!

I'd been told they'd gone offline but not the whole gory story. How humiliating for Andy - to be banninated from his own site.  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 10:32, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Document the 'crash' as an article

Shouldn't we have something like Conservapedia:Crash documenting all the lulz the Assfly's cock-up generated. Can someone who followed what was going on more closely save the story for posterity. Auld Nick 13:57, 28 January 2009 (EST)

On second thoughts Conservapedia:The week that never was. Auld Nick 05:43, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Finally something to WIGO

Usually, revealing obvious and childish wandalism such as this and this isn't my cup of tea, but the fact that it starts pouring in less than half an hour after the site starts working again, cracked me up. Good work, everyone! Etc 19:38, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Oh wait, I just noticed a big difference; CP doesn't have the /wiki/ prefix on links anymore, that is, http://www.conservapedia.com/Goat is not http://www.conservapedia.com/wiki/Goat. I guess we'll have to update all non-permanent links to CP, and interwiki-links (like CP:Goat) no longer works as expected. Anyone with magical powers who knows how to change that sort of stuff? Etc 19:42, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I guess sooner or later they'll get their mod-rewrite-fu on and it'll start working again. I'd hold fire on changing things until whatever they're doing has stabilised. --JeevesMkII 19:48, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Was about to say the same. Right now, it's all very raw there. No Conserv skin, no logo, etc. --Sid 19:49, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I don't know much about MediaWiki, but is there any particular reason to have the /wiki/ prefix on urls, except, obviously, if you have more stuff on the server than just the wiki? Etc 19:55, 27 January 2009 (EST)

The /wiki/ thing is back. - User $\pi$ 20:47, 27 January 2009 (EST)

They have always in the past used conservapedia.com/$1 as far as advantages/disadvantages go, if you are not working with multiple things like we are with our forums it is just preference and ease of configuration/options for configurations. I am sympathetic on this point. URL redirects are an absolute bitch, it was one of the last things I managed to get working right after the server move. tmtoulouse 20:55, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I still can't get URL redirects workig on my local MediaWiki install. Can't even get rid of the 'index.php' part. My head doesn't work that way I suppose... Worm ^{(t | c)} 02:21, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Basically, the /wiki/ prefix is just a convenience. MediaWiki basically works just fine when you have access to the index.php file (In a default, out-of-box MediaWiki install the links usually look like /installdirectory/index.php/Page_name), but if you want nice urls with no "index.php" in them, you can use Apache's mod_rewrite, and then the prefix doesn't matter at all - it can be anything or nothing. (It's also convenient for some segregation; I think Wikipedia puts the MediaWiki install location (/w/index.php) in robots.txt, so that the spiders do not bother indexing the entire histories of the articles, edit pages, and all that junk... --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 03:05, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Oh it works fine, it just offends my delicate sensibilities :) Worm ^{(t | c)} 04:55, 28 January 2009 (EST)

I for one, do not like the childish wandalism --GTac 21:05, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I for one don't like childish wikisites. But I agree on the wandalism too. That's why my only "wandalism" is making cuttingly intuitive remarks on their articles.-Diadochus

Is Croc really trying to reinstate a whole weeks worth of front page stories? --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 21:15, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Obama still not president...

... on CP. But I'm sure he'll get there. --Horace 21:01, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Obama isn't Hussein yet, or at least not with the article title. --Kangaxx 22:44, 27 January 2009 (EST)

They're working on it. They've added the President template, but the article is otherwise still as it was before inauguration: "Obama will likely be the first Muslim President" and so on. --Tony Sidaway 00:57, 28 January 2009 (EST)

The article is now a FANTASTIC mishmash of gibberish. Part of the article states he's President, part of it says he's the President-Elect, part of it says he's the one-time Senator of Illinois. Then there's the speculation that he'll use the Koran at his inauguration. Any unfortunate child trying to learn from this encyclopedia would have their head spinning. Oh Dear Andy, yet more Epic Phailure. DogP 15:10, 28 January 2009 (EST)

The timing was sweet justice. We have had to make many edits related to the change of administration in the US ourselves, and we aren't even trying to build a 'pedia. They lost every post-inaugural edit they made, and will have to go through everything that changed all over again. ħuman 15:56, 28 January 2009 (EST)

You couldn't write a worse article if you tried. Yours truly^{Dear Sir} 16:06, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Making up for lost time?

Christ, it just got up and there's a shitload of stuff in the CP twisted and biased worldview news section. Andy trying to make up for lost time? ENorman 22:34, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I suspect DeanS was keeping up with his news items "off line" during the break. ħuman 23:10, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Strange

Note the IP (209.85.100.44 - it's CP's) Love² 23:13, 27 January 2009 (EST)

These posts are several years old. Do IPs get recycled? TheoryOfPractice 23:19, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Not for webservers. - User $\pi$ 00:25, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Bitches be crazy! It's like whoever uses that IP, they're infected with Godspeed. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 00:33, 28 January 2009 (EST) (medical hiatus :P)

Surely not every website has its own unique IP? Don't hosting companies have several/many websites in subdirectories for a single IP and the DNS directs to the correct one? Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 02:26, 28 January 2009 (EST)

There's nothing but CP shown on this IP (had the pages but closed 'em: Google 209.85.100.44) Love² 02:28, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Do the bot!

the broken links to CP? On wikipedia there are accounts called "bots" that can make edits automatically using a programming language. Could that be useful?--216.118.68.193 23:28, 27 January 2009 (EST)

ACD bot could be reprogrammed I guess. Ask Trent. - User $\pi$ 00:23, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Let's wait and see if they fix the /wiki thing first? ħuman 01:10, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Maybe we could get Redirect fixer to do it. :) --Marty 02:01, 28 January 2009 (EST)

I think it was noted above that they fixed the /wiki thing, so our links should be good again. Yeah, they did. ħuman 15:58, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Blocking

Has the "missing time" resulted in the unblocking of blocks as well? TK's just made a load of /16 blocks in under 20 minutes - looks as if he's exercising his checkuser muscles. Love² 00:22, 28 January 2009 (EST)

I think there is definitely a bug with their IP blocks; for the first time in nearly two years the half a dozen range blocks covering Fairbanks no longer affect me :) Icewedge 00:29, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Bet that'll be taken care of in 5 ... 4 ... 3 .... Love² 00:41, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Bear in mind that as well as losing a week's worth of content, the wiki has also lost a week's worth of user and IP blocks. I suspect that many of these blocks are just repetitions of actions that were carried out in the lost week. --Tony Sidaway 00:49, 28 January 2009 (EST)

No my uni was blocked 2 months ago and I can get back in. - User $\pi$ 00:51, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Did HDCase do something in the missing period? His contribs show no action since last year. Love² 01:23, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Nope. He didn't do anything. Couldn't, he was still banned. TK's just an ass. Barikada 01:38, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Do I recall somewhere on RW listing TK's blocks (can't find anything myself)? He could be using that to reinstate them. The power of ^love² 04:31, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Yes, look up Conservapedia:Range_blocks and Conservapedia:IP_blocks, but they were both a little out of date. TK has been very busy re-instating the blocks from before. Has he got an offline spreadsheet or something, or does he just reference us? A pity, though that he has no control over the User Rights log... Oh Andy, where art thou? Bondurant 06:02, 28 January 2009 (EST)

For once, I'm glad that I didn't update Conservapedia:IP_blocks. I assume that TK keeps a log for his blocks, his private hit-list. He reinstated the blocks he had made, but Karajou's blocks of this period seem to be lost.

Range	/16	/17	/18	/19	/20	/21	/22	/23	/24	/25	/26	/27	/28	/29	/30	/31	/32
IPs in Range	65536	32768	16384	8192	4096	2048	1024	512	256	128	64	32	16	8	4	2	1
#Blocks Jan 25	97	3	16	29	14	1	54	5	137	1		1	1	5			706
#Blocks Jan 28	92	3	16	27	13	2	47	5	137	1		1	1	5			696

l'arron^{sicut fur in nocte} 06:42, 28 January 2009 (EST)

The FLQ's name is pretty now!

[2] Pffthahahahaha. Barikada 00:53, 28 January 2009 (EST)

We point it out, TK fixes it. So I won't point out the many articles with the same problem that remain. --Marty 02:19, 28 January 2009 (EST)

The difficult we do at once...

From the reverted wandalism linkie above, Andy's World History Lecture One:

One cannot fully understand 9/11, violence in the Middle East, or hostility between India and Pakistan without learning World history. We will.

<sings> To dream... the impossible dream... --Marty 02:00, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Gentlemen

We have our first phone call on the new lines. Who still uses dial up? - User $\pi$ 02:20, 28 January 2009 (EST)

F! It's CUR! Love² 02:22, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Maybe Ken's a therian too given how much he love cheetahs. Hang on, love cheetahs, can't spell but criticizes others spelling, goes on about how high his IQ is, constantly trying to get our attention; CUR is Ken. 02:35, 28 January 2009 (EST)

I wouldn't imagine that dial-up users would see any difference in their download speed, they are already rate-limited by their modem. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 02:34, 28 January 2009 (EST)

And why their speed should affect the number of views is quite baffling ... unless they've been snowed under previously, ... or something ... or not ... Love² 02:38, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Well his concise articles are fucking long, maybe people get bored waiting for them to load. - User $\pi$ 02:42, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Also why does it take for ever to load anything on their faster server? - User $\pi$ 02:43, 28 January 2009 (EST)

'cos it's down right now. --JeevesMkII 02:45, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Ken burnt it; anyone have a screencap? Educated harmonic Phantom! 16:16, 28 January 2009 (EST)

trustworthy - a short rant

Let's see whether I get it right: an enterprise which labels itself trustworthy seems to have lost the combined efforts of some score of volunteers for a whole week, showing thereby that it can't be entrusted with safekeeping the work of its contributors... And the management doesn't give the slightest hint

• whether this work is lost altogether
• whether it will be retrieved
• why it was lost in the first place
• whether such data-losses will occur in the future

Instead of an explanation, we get this little gem:

---

Do I have to rewrite my articles?

I put up a bunch of new articles in the last week but they don't seem to be here. do I have to write them again? ReneeStJ 19:08, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Yes, Renee, you do. They apparently only back up their servers once a week, and can't keep their systems in order enough to make sure that they don't need the backup regularly. This, obviously, is what happens when you ban all smart people from your site. This site is growing rapidly!!!-GiulioC 20:24, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Is there any chance that we might get some information on what just happened? Has the last 7 days of edits been lost permanently or will it be restored? Tk, if you know could you take a few minutes out from blocking IP addresses to let us know what is going on? Thanks. AndyJM 06:10, 28 January 2009 (EST)

These questions are valid, but their tone seems unduly confrontational and (in one case) mocking.--CPalmer 06:17, 28 January 2009 (EST)

---

Well, we know that it is incompetence pure and simple, but for an honest editor, it has to feel like malice. l'arron^{sicut fur in nocte} 07:13, 28 January 2009 (EST)

AndyJM's post is spot on. I wonder what Andy's reply will be. Or will they just sweep the whole incident under the carpet? -- Nx ^talk 07:40, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Asshole -- Nx ^talk 07:45, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Clearly the hamster isn't up to speed yet - database has just been locked down. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 07:49, 28 January 2009 (EST)

And the official ungrammatical reply: disk crash -- Nx ^talk 08:01, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Was there ever an apology more sincere than this one by Andy:We'll do what we can, and apologize for any inconvenience and data loss. Thanks for understanding.--Andy Schlafly 09:09, 28 January 2009 (EST) . Granted, it is hidden at a talk page, and he was beaten to it by PJR ... l'arron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:54, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Dear all, Any chance of sticking to BLACK print on a WHITE background? Old farts like me find the pale green on white very difficult to read! (I'm 59 you know but I bet you'll never be able to guess how old I am.) Mick McT 10:33, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Tha'art but a babby.  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 11:56, 28 January 2009 (EST)

May I extol the many and manifold virtues of turning off custom fonts and colours in your browser's preferences? I only wish more people would do it, so that web page authors would get the message that it isn't cool to dick around with these things. Personally, I don't care that you want to have bright cyan text in some irritating custom font, I just want to read the text. --JeevesMkII 10:41, 28 January 2009 (EST)

The irritating font is an idea I stole from PZ Myers. On his great blog Pharyngula he uses it to highlight the quotes of lunatics. I think it's a good way to mark longer quotations from conservapedia, as done above. But I'll stick to black and white in the future. l'arron^{sicut fur in nocte} 11:47, 28 January 2009 (EST)

(I like the serif font for quotes, but have to agree on the gray (green?????) colour - it's not the best.  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 11:58, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Instead of quoting, just link. This is t'internet, after all. --JeevesMkII 12:14, 28 January 2009 (EST)

And we are talking about conservapedia, which proved to be one of the bigger memory holes... l'arron^{sicut fur in nocte} 12:26, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Looks like Andy had better get this bit of liberal content editted out of his Bible. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Tah-daaaaaaah!} 12:51, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Evidently, the translation project is more urgent than previously expected! 14:20, 28 January 2009 (EST)

I like the idea, but we should use a lighter color.... A dark red or blue would be nice, and much easier to read. SirChuckB^{I have very poor judgement} 15:32, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Oo It shows up as gray here. Barikada 16:29, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Bernard Goldberg

Is right wing darling Bernard Goldberg taking lessons from Conservapedia? His quotes of a Charlie Rose interview with Tom Brokaw could teach the Assfly lessons on how to quote mine. MDB 13:33, 28 January 2009 (EST)

He's a real scumbag. I noticed that he got the somber rather than comical Worst Person in the World send-off last night from Keith Olbermann. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Tah-daaaaaaah!} 13:39, 28 January 2009 (EST)

That was such a massive distortion I was wondering if Goldberg could be used for libel. MDB 14:26, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Yeah... I can't stand the bastard... I'll try and find the video when Al Franken pwned him... It reminds me a lot of this POS. SirChuckB^{I have very poor judgement} 15:38, 28 January 2009 (EST)

From the last link: "It’s not my responsibility to go and find out how every single particular circumstance is handled on the Pelosi vineyard." Yeah, actually, it is. It's called doing your research. Idiot. Barikada 16:31, 28 January 2009 (EST)

More broken things

Anyone have any idea what this means? alt 13:51, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Well, the error means a SQL join fucked up because the things being compared aren't directly comparable because they're in different character sets. How in the name of goat they managed to get their database in to this state, well, your guess is as good as mine. --JeevesMkII 13:55, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Hmm, SQL is something I'd always meant to learn a bit of but have never gotten around to bothering. They've certainly screwed up something; this is what led me to the first link I posted, and then there's the WIGO on JM's name. I think the real question is how they manage to run a wiki/webserver at all! (for suitable value of "run") alt 13:59, 28 January 2009 (EST)

None of the math tags are working, either. The Sierpinski thing is due to symbols in wiki links, which aren't working. They've got problems. 207.67.17.45 14:06, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Ed Poor

Discussion moved to Conservapedia Talk:Sysops/Ed Poor#Citizendium

Iduan gets mean

[3] I especially like the last bit where he all but admits he can break the rules, as long as it's against liberals. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 15:58, 28 January 2009 (EST)

It's the way into Andy's heart - in my opinion Andy thinks of most of the editors as parasites, he fails to see that the relationship is far more symbiotic. And a thought for Iduan: it's the hallmark of a gentleman to be courteous especially if the situation doesn't require it! --l'arron^{sicut fur in nocte} 16:08, 28 January 2009 (EST)

I wouldn't really mind yet another jerk on CP, but it pains me to see Iduan suddenly slapping other editors around with that "Andy owns the site, and that makes everything Andy does 100% awesome! And if you don't agree with Andy, then you don't belong here!" attitude. Seriously, dude, would it have killed you to make a sock instead of ruining your old reputation? --Sid 17:23, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Isn't Iduan a parodist? Seems odd, after Bugler- wait, he never learns, does he? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistor^{is Rodney McKay} 20:03, 28 January 2009 (EST)

RobertA

Are we organized enough to sanction anything? And if so how do we decide? --BoredCPer 19:13, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Well, the Newcomers' Guide states that "we do not condone vandalism of other wikis", although users here may be tempted decide to act on their own initiative. Just TK bumping the paranoia up a notch. Klapaucius^{Esteemed Constructor} 19:23, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Well, looking at the logs, TK and Jallen deleted an article called Conservapedia:Barack Obama comparison around the same time RobertA was banned, so I guess he created it. And since that article comes from RW, that automatically means that we sanctioned that vandalism. I mean, like duh. Just like it's Wikipedia-sanctioned vandalism when someone randomly copypastes WP articles to-... no, wait... --Sid 19:56, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Anonymous?

Image backup of the oversighted diff

They are legion--the question is, is this legit? And does anyone at CP even know what Anonymous is? TheoryOfPractice 21:19, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Eh-what? Please explain- still blocked from CP. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistor^{is Rodney McKay} 21:20, 28 January 2009 (EST)

The big question is not if it's legit. The big question is will CP contact the FBI? Hactar 21:22, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Don't think Anon would bother with them - it's a hoax.  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 21:25, 28 January 2009 (EST)

On the plus side (for them at least), now they have someone to blame for their recent downtime, and the myriad of issues still bugging the site. They can claim that instead of the problems being a result of their incompetence, it must have been Anonymous testing to see how vulnerable CP is. -Redback^G'day 21:30, 28 January 2009 (EST)

But Anonymous has threatened conservapedia, or at least Frullic claims. Is this WIGO worthy? If so, someone please give me a hand. And I think an FBI joke is due right about here. Hactar 21:20, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Who in the name of the great and almighty rusty-spotted cat- errr. . . GOAT! is Anonymous? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistor^{is Rodney McKay} 21:23, 28 January 2009 (EST)

@ CUR--look up "Anonymous" on WP. (Anonymous (group))They are legion--and the kind of thing you might actually find interesting. TheoryOfPractice 21:24, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Or even here.  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 21:28, 28 January 2009 (EST)

I tried to delete this section because of the one above, as I think having two sections on the same topic is confusing at best- can someone with better wiki skills than I merge them or something? Hactar 21:30, 28 January 2009 (EST) thus? ^(Toast) _{and marmalade}

(CUR, if you're blocked from reading CP: it's not them; it's something else that's doing it.  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 21:32, 28 January 2009 (EST)

And CUR if your parents monitor anything on your internet usage: STAY AWAY FROM 4Chan!  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 21:34, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Actually CUR as a general piece of advise stay away from 4Chan, they would eat you alive. - User $\pi$ 22:00, 28 January 2009 (EST)

I've done a few Anonymous things before, and generally we leave wikis alone because they are so easy to revert the vandalism of. Unless somebody bruteforced Andy's password or something epic like that, it'd be fruitless. Not only that, but most Anon raids are either against groups that have directly insulted them (Subeta "stealing the longcat and selling it as an item on their premium shop), or if a group really, really pisses them off (Scientology) ENorman 21:41, 28 January 2009 (EST)

With Anon, it's impossible to say that they aren't behind something like this, because it could easily be a few of them doing this. Also: "and make Oprah Winfrey say idiotic things on her show so do not underestimate them." THE FIENDS!! Barikada 22:31, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Just because the warning was reverted, I hope that helps instigate an attack. Though instead of blaming ebaums world as per regulation, they'll probably latch it to us instead. But yeah, anybody can go under the Anonymous banner, so you never know. ENorman 23:41, 28 January 2009 (EST)

While I know Anonymous and the chans loathe Conservapedia (I still see threads now and then talking about how messed up CP is and some small-scale wandalism from them), the vibe I also get from them is that it's so lightweight and inherently lulzy on its own is that it's not worth attacking en masse. Beyond that, I'm not sure what they can do that the usual gang of idiots do to themselves over there or what good parodists have already achieved. If they actually are planning something, it should be interesting to see what they cook up, though. A chanology-like attack against Conservapedia could likely tip Andy beyond the breaking point. Photovoltaic Array 06:00, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Did Andy wipe the history again? I'm getting the error-this-revision-does-not-exist message, so I have no idea what you all are talking about. I would appreciate it if someone pointed me to a screenshot of whatever it was. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:38, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Presume it's been oversighted or rev hidden away. Twas just a post saying that they were gonna be attacked by anon like $cientology & Oprah.  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 00:58, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Thank you for explaining, Toast. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 01:02, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Extracts from History:

1. (cur) (last) 23:13, 28 January 2009 Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) (49,579 bytes) (→Request: removed garbage)
2. (cur) (last) 21:18, 28 January 2009 Jpatt (Talk | contribs) (50,351 bytes) (Undo revision 615791 by Frullic (Talk))

 ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 01:36, 29 January 2009 (EST)

I've added an image backup from my cache. --Sid 06:56, 29 January 2009 (EST)

What form would an Anonymous DoS attack actually take? Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 08:06, 29 January 2009 (EST)

I assume (from a basis of ignorance,) that they'd just overwhelm the server with requests, both individually & using bots. Anyone tell more, please?  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 09:00, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Pretty much. Simple brute force attack, unless someone with a clue takes interest. And sending exploding vans ocf. Chris Fanshaw 09:06, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Considering that Anonymous is just a catch all phrase for any group of pissed off people on the internet, it's hardly even meaningful to speculate if "anonymous" is doing it! But surely even they (and by they I mean, whoever) have better things to do with their time than this. ArmondikoV^sshole 09:26, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Not really. Chris Fanshaw 09:34, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Andy really doesn't like Comedy Central, does he?

though in his defense, aside from Stewart and Colbert Comedy Central rarely makes me laugh^{— Unsigned, by: ENorman / talk / contribs}

What an ass. But we knew that... ħuman 23:56, 28 January 2009 (EST)

He's been even more of a vindictive little (rhymes with "runt") lately. I think the election broke whatever was left of his brain.-Diadochus 00:20, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Ready for the homework marking? And the boy/girl exams?  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 00:24, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Let us never forget Lewis Black roasting the site back in 2007. Photovoltaic Array 05:47, 29 January 2009 (EST)

"For those who want to forever remain ignorant, return to watching Comedy Central." (emphasis mine) <-- Is it just me, or does it sound as if he's saying that his World History course is my last chance of enlightenment? --Sid 06:49, 29 January 2009 (EST)

I like how he implies that getting a 100% on his course is something special, while all it takes for the students is to just make liberal bash comments or flatter Andy in every question. Honestly, how does Andy rationalize to himself that give a 10/10 to an obvious incorrect answer is a good thing which doesn't tarnish his "educational integrity". --GTac 10:35, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Clearly comedians are part of the liberal cult to destroy conservatism. How many conservative comedians are even out there (who are actually trying to be funny instead of just doing it by talking)? Dennis Miller...Toby Keith (not exactly a comedian but he was great on the Colbert Christmas episode)? Trey Parker is a Libertarian interestingly enough... ~Ttony21^{(talk, contribs)} 13:57, 29 January 2009 (EST)

He also doesn't realize that at least one CC show (Colbert) seems to get some of their material from CP. At least twice, I've seen Colbert use a line that matched almost verbatum a post on CP (usually from the news section, and not parodists) from the current or previous day. In the Burris thing, CP had two separate news items, one saying he wouldn't be appointed because Democrats are racist, and another saying that if he was, it would only be because the Democrats are racist. Colbert used that for his opening material that night. Kallium^talk 14:18, 29 January 2009 (EST)

It may seem that way, but I doubt it, really. The CP borken news is mostly a ticker taken from the same handful of usual suspect sources, and Colbert's writers probably mine them daily themselves. Now, even if I'm right, it is funny that items that CP sees as important news are seen by the Colbert team as comedy gold... ħuman 20:30, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Andy's edit to the article itself is pure gold. I mean, I know we see past the whole "CP is an encyclopedia" thing, but Andy obviously genuinely believes it. Which makes one wonder what type of encyclopedia he thinks would contain such blatantly slanted wording? (Apart from Wikipedia, obv.)

Also, what are the bets that if that edit was made by a new user, he would be reverted and blocked as a parodist? It just looks too parody-like to be legit Andy now. Dreaded Walrus 15:21, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Quick! Someone tell Andy! Another study saying that sex is bad for you!

See?!?! Sexual activity in young men may lead to prostate cancer!!! Setting aside the fact that a few other studies roundly refute the conclusion, this could be Andy's next best hope to stifle sexuality!-Diadochus 00:15, 29 January 2009 (EST)

But according to this study, you can also get prostate-cancer from marital sex, and that sort of puts a damper on the whole "be fruitful and multiply" thing... ListenerX^TalkerX 00:48, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Yeah, but Paul said all sex was bad. Marital sex is just the only kind that doesn't lead to damnation. But that doesn't make it good. -Hactar, signed out for zoning out for too long.

I would like the idea that all sex is bad to be practiced as well as preached for these people. It would solve all the world's problems in about 30-40 years time. ArmondikoV^sshole 09:19, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Why are you assuming that Andy would consider that it also applies to marital sex? As long as it can be used to attack the things he dislikes, he can ignore how it applies to his own principles, it's the way he has always done thing. Like the ABORTION CAUSES BREAST CANCER BECAUSE BREASTFEEDING REDUCES THE CHANCE OF CANCER thing, it also means that ABSTINENCE CAUSES BREASTCANCER, but Andy will never be fooled by these liberal tactics of logic and reasoning. --GTac 10:18, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Soon to be on Ken's bookshelf?

New study argues that Darwin was attracted to the idea of common descent out of a sense of rage at the enslavement of black people. TheoryOfPractice 08:09, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Are you calling parrot Darwin a liar when he says he ♥s evolutionary racism? Say it ain't so. --JeevesMkII 08:11, 29 January 2009 (EST)

But the BBC is liberal in CP's eyes, and therefore anything they say is invalid, as well as deceitful propaganda unless it happens to coincide with what they think. ENorman 09:03, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Correction:

But xxx is liberal in CP's eyes, and therefore anything they say is invalid, as well as deceitful propaganda unless it happens to coincide with what they think. (replace "xxx" with name of your choice)  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 09:20, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Someone's got out of the wrong side of bed

This is a remarkably rude way to address a loyal acolyte.--Kriss Akabusi^{AAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1} 09:08, 29 January 2009 (EST)

WTF! what's he done to deserve that? Doesn't seem to have done a whole lot, good or bad. It looks as if andy's been disappointed in love or summat & is lashing out wildly.  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 09:16, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Did Andy take into account all the substantial edits of the week Jan 19 - Jan 26? For someone who expects courtesy, no reverence, of all others, he's remarkably rude. l'arron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:19, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Maybe Andy spotted the "PJR should run conservapedia" userbox on PhilipV's user page. JoeDuffy 09:31, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Also I note he has visited several European countries and may have been infected with Liberalitus. Seriously I think Andy is geting more than a little paranoid these days. StarFish 09:34, 29 January 2009 (EST)

His courtesy is as great as his management skills. Heck, he lost the data of a week, and still his only explanation for this is hidden somewhere in talk, talk, talk? Andy has shown that he only cares for the well-being of his few home-schoolers. I presume that he had informed these personally about the status of the website. What would the right thing to do? Act offensively! Explain the error, excuse for the loss, call for a boost of edits to make up for it, and promise to back-up more often. And do so on the main page! At the moment, the common editors are on the loss, those who have registered in the lost week, have lost there account. Should they re-register? The log-in screen advises against such an action.

As Andy is unable to act humble, even if it is called for, he can't to the right thing: Most probably, PhilipV has lost his last edits, but does he get an excuse? Nope.

l'arron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:35, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Considering how obnoxious Andy can be it amazes me that people spend time making serious contributions to the site. His attitude tends to be "You owe me for giving you this opportunity to contribute". JoeDuffy 09:48, 29 January 2009 (EST)

The ironic part is, that's exactly why a lot of the folks here went to CP in the first place, even though they weren't conservatives. It's fun to contribute to an encyclopedia that's in such early stages. There's all sorts of info you can add, and ways to contribute meaningfully. There were several who said all they wanted to do was contribute, and were happy to find a place in that stage. --Kels 10:20, 29 January 2009 (EST)

But Andy really doesn't appreciate that, even less than other sysops. Unless you're making anti-liberal ideological edits & comments, he barely cares. Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 11:25, 29 January 2009 (EST)

At least he's got something to cheer himself up with, if that is indeed the case. Perhaps the reality of losing a week's page views has also contributed to his bad mood, however? Klapaucius^{Esteemed Constructor} 09:50, 29 January 2009 (EST)

PhilipV did make a comment on the MediaWiki_talk:Username blacklist about 25 minutes prior to Andy's callout. Also his talk page has a couple of other users complaning about the lack of substance in his edits. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 10:00, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Ah - I hadn't seen that list before. I now understand why I couldn't register my real name DryfistfucK the other day. Matt 17:04, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Everybody probably blames him for the loss of a week's work. People think he should be a bit apologetic. Most reasonable people would be. Andy just tells everyone off and resorts to argumentum ad banhammer. Proxima Centauri 10:50, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Since anyone Andy gives a shit about was with him whining in DC during the period of lost edits (even though it's not true, they weren't away a week) it's no big deal to him. Now, I gotta say, I think the blacklisted name page is my favorite part of CP. Just imagining Andy be forced to type in all those words he finds so foul. I notice "gerbil" and any variations of the word have been added. Hmmmmm. Something hitting a bit close to home, Andy? DickTurpis 11:51, 29 January 2009 (EST)

I keep reading that rude comment as "I've reviewed your edits and they lack sufficient goat"... Which at least would be funny. What an ass. ħuman 13:57, 29 January 2009 (EST)

@ DT, yeah... Andy is the genius who coined our "Hot. Science. RationalWiki!" slogan. I also found out (ugh) what "lemon party" and "tub girl" are from his typing them on his blog... ħuman 14:03, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Joaquín gets locked out

I assume that this is Joaquín Martinez knocking on Andy's door? Gotta love HWessel's follow up comment. JoeDuffy 09:58, 29 January 2009 (EST)

That would presumably be because the special character í no longer works? He would need to log in as Joaquín Martínez. Klapaucius^{Esteemed Constructor} 10:02, 29 January 2009 (EST)

And we all know who HWessel is. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 10:03, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Arggh, I hadn't realized that JMR10 is Joaquin Martinez...

HWessel? As in Horst Wessel? A little to obvious... l'arron^{sicut fur in nocte} 10:06, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Interesting. I was only thinking of Chekov from Star Trek. Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 10:10, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Hope Joaquin reads this page, because he's unlikely to get help over there. Hola Joaquín, si usted está leyendo. Me gusta su uso muy creativo de fotos y dibujos. Sigue, macho.--Kriss Akabusi^{AAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1} 10:08, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Judging from this, TK doesn't know what happened - and can't or won't help Joaquín.... l'arron^{sicut fur in nocte} 10:32, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Didn't we have something similar happen way back (2007?)  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 10:42, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Wow. He should be a system administrator, what with that ability to diagnose a problem. Commodore Guff (blocked for five years) 11:31, 29 January 2009 (EST)

You bastards! [4]. You could have given me a chance... I doubt someone blind to the bloody obvious would have spotted it. HWessel 11:38, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Dude, you think a name like "HWessel" didn't set off alarm bells? Guys like TK and Dean and Karajou may be idiots, but they know their Nazis. TheoryOfPractice 11:42, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Try again as HorstW. We'll keep quiet this time.--Kriss Akabusi^{AAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1} 11:52, 29 January 2009 (EST)

If anyone has block rights over there you really have to give JMR10 an infinite block for not usning first name and last initial. DickTurpis 11:56, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Yeah, I should have guessed he'd be listening to it on winamp. Looking at my contribs, some have been reverted as vandalism, whilst others have been kept (and improved). I can't for the life of me figure out how they chose... HWessel 12:01, 29 January 2009 (EST)

(EC)HW, even without the name, you waaay overcooked the parody. Every edit was to punt in an atheist or liberal wiki-link (including in your old Europe holiday statement) everywhere, putting in B. Hussein Obama as his "full" name on another page and then brown nosing on Asclafly's talk page within minutes of creating your account. Since Bugler, any aspiring parodist needs to slow cook their OTT edits. Bondurant 12:02, 29 January 2009 (EST)

"any aspiring parodist needs to slow cook their OTT edits" -- That's what I'm doing... MDB 12:06, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Yet compared to the edits of, say, Ed, TK or the Great Fly himself, they were hardly exaggerated, weren't they? HWessel 12:33, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Enter Poe's Law. I can't tell you how many things I've seen that I thought were blatant parody and turned out to be an Aschlafly "insight." For example, when I saw Henry Kissinger listed as a liberal intellectual I assumed it must be parody, but it was put in by Andy himself. Corry^{Wow. We're just blowing through nap time, aren't we?} 12:52, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Hadn't looked at that (lib intellectuals) before; start to finish a humungous laugh. I particularly like the "privileged youth" comments - anything strike you? Andy?  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 13:00, 29 January 2009 (EST)

The liberal intellectual page is mostly parody. I added almost half the names myself. I was very annoyed when Hawking and MLK were removed. DickTurpis 13:06, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Did anyone ever attempt to add Mr. Schlafly to this list? ListenerX^TalkerX 13:10, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Andy did make 10 or so edits though.  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 13:12, 29 January 2009 (EST)

I laughed my ass off at Oscar Wilde being downplayed for making comedies, and saying Robert Oppenheimer had accomplished nothing notable. Wasn't he the guy that basically designed the first nuke? Wouldn't warmongers like Andy love this man? ENorman 15:14, 29 January 2009 (EST)

(unindent) Oppenheimer was a commie. Or at least he had friends who might have attended a party where a communist was in the next room. And he opposed Teller's building of the Hydrogen Bomb. England had Turing, we had Oppenheimer. At least Oppenheimer didn't kill himself. Hactar 15:30, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Revert in 5 ... 4 ... 3 ...

Nothing more to say  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 11:55, 29 January 2009 (EST)

What did I say?  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 12:04, 29 January 2009 (EST)

I love it. I don't know why they don't just shorten the article to Human babies are delivered to their parents by storks. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Tah-daaaaaaah!} 12:08, 29 January 2009 (EST)

That's one of my favorite CP articles. I always chuckle fondly when I read it. ħuman 14:11, 29 January 2009 (EST)

They nuked that one change. The only sign of it is that they left the revert in the history. Sloppy. Hactar 15:33, 29 January 2009 (EST)

I see someone (it wasn't me) ran with my idea about the storks. Human, you're right. That whole ramble about souls and abortion is just a gem. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Tah-daaaaaaah!} 09:47, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Heh, yeah, that is funny too... (comment truncated when I realized that saying what I was going to say would ruin the fun). ħuman 20:55, 30 January 2009 (EST)

fuzzy math

Any idea where Andy got the figures for this edit? Isn't he of by a factor of 100 or so? DickTurpis 12:01, 29 January 2009 (EST)

I also heard that the Democrates voted 30 to 1 to rape your babies--GTac 12:13, 29 January 2009 (EST)

30 to 1? Who was the lone sellout? DickTurpis 12:16, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Lieberman, of course. Everybody knows he's a DINO. MDB 12:27, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Someone's been reading WIGO  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 13:27, 29 January 2009 (EST) ($200,000 each ↓ $16,000 per family - not a great difference.  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade}

Or maybe he's reading his own wiki? --Kels 13:47, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Classic Andy. Can't admit a mistake. He's not correcting a blatant error, he's "improving" the figures. Well, changing them from egregiously wrong to basically correct is an improvement, I'll grant him that. DickTurpis 14:59, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Revert & Ban in 5 ... 4 .... 2 ....

Jonsociologist Strange name) takes offence at Kajagoogoo for reverting his edit!  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 13:21, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Partly right,anyhow and the comment to Jon reads: "For starters, the entry you posted in Eyespot began this way: "Richard Dawkins, an evil evolutionist and an Atheist opponent of religion". And yes, I reverted it again. I have no problem if you want to write your entries in a professional manner. If you want to be childish in your edits, you'll be removed from the site.", so can a block be far behind?  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 14:12, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Funny how eyespot neglects to mention the "feature" many fish have. ħuman 16:48, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Took some time.  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 02:44, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Republican Govs/Dem Senators

The guy who reinstated it had klaimed to be a member of the New York Chapter of the KKK on his user page. (he was blocked)  ^(Toast) _{and marmalade} 13:43, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Hm, but the description didn't really look convincing. Probably a vandal. I doubt that the KKK is now in league with Conservapedia seeing as they're not really racist (Christian conservatives who think Obama is a Muslim maybe but not racist).~Ttony21^{(talk, contribs)} 14:33, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Oh, Andy is a bit racist, but he's not white supremacist, which is a different matter. So yeah, CP is not pro-KKK by any means. Though they still have a bit in common in terms of religious beliefs. DickTurpis 14:37, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Fair enough. I also have a feeling that page is going to be re-added a few more times before this whole thing dies down. ~Ttony21^{(talk, contribs)} 14:43, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Of course since the KKK is hateful, and according to CP Bigotry is an exclusively liberal trait, the KKK is liberal. Amirite? ENorman 15:20, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Ok, it's time to come clean. I was QWest. I chose the name based on my ISP. I felt the list was pretty subtle parody and I'm glad it lasted as long as it did as it clearly exposed CP's willingness to accept implied threats against liberals. I readded it once after the site came back (with plenty of snark and MOAR HITLER added just to make the parody obvious). When I get my home connectivity to RW fixed, I'll upload a screenshot of the new version I uploaded. Honestly, I had no idea it would generate any sort of attention beyond RW, and I was in fact a bit nervous when Wonkette linked it. For any FBI or Secret Service who may be reading this, it was parody for the purpose of exposing CP's own tolerance for hatred of liberals. I absolutely do not endorse violence of any sort. Stile4aly 15:02, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Good effort! An original parody. I wish I was as imaginative. Oh well. I'll just have to satisfy myself by adding MOAR HITLER. StarFish 15:34, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Stile4aly, you're a very naughty boy! Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 15:49, 29 January 2009 (EST)

You know, this is the one piece of parody that I feel badly about. Although I think it was an accurate reflection of CP's tolerance for anti-liberal hatred, it was in poor taste and for that I do feel remorse. Stile4aly 16:19, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Don't feel too bad. Wonkette's "hit list" interpretation was only one way to read it. When I read it, it made sense in a mildly subversive political sense - a list, say, of senators to focus on over ethics, election fraud, finance fraud, etc. It's a bit like the lists we see at election time of "vulnerable seats". IOW, if some of those Dems could have been unseated by "other than electoral" means - not violence, just things like investigations into the senators dealings - they might be replaced with GOP people. Of course, now it will forever be a "hit list" in people's minds. ħuman 16:37, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Feel bad? No need at all! Just look at how much good came of this. We're happy because it got noticed and serves to highlights the wackyness of Conservapedia to the general public. Wonkette and their readers are happy because they get something to laugh about. Andy is (presumably) happy because he gets to fume over the Eeevil Liberals at Wonkette. And even Ken must be happy because the link from Wonkette is good for his precious search rankings. In other words, more or less everyone is happy, so at least utilitarianistically speaking, this must be a good thing. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:48, 29 January 2009 (EST)

AKjeldsen arguing from a pro-utilitarian perspective of ethics? I wouldn't have ever thought...216.221.87.112 17:55, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Sometimes, you just gotta go with what works. </sophist> --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 08:34, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Proverbs

Doesn't this neatly sum up everything that's wrong with CP? ^{— Unsigned, by: Ajkgordon / talk / contribs}

Pretty much, yeah... ħuman 16:46, 29 January 2009 (EST)

This is a great reply by CPalmer regarding Andy's biblical "interpretation." I think that it is inevitable that people who use the bible as a tool of persecution must at some point convince themselves that at least some part of it doesn't apply to them. Here is one of Andy's rationalizations. Very nice. Corry^{Wow. We're just blowing through nap time, aren't we?} 03:05, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Oh, how I larfed

Wish I could share this but a recent edit by a CP sysop reintroduced some lulz to an edited article. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 17:00, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Is CP Borken Again?

Sigh. --SpinyNorman 17:21, 29 January 2009 (EST)

It's still working for me, although for some reason the Alger Hiss article isn't. And as I was typing that, the site briefly went down but came up again almost immediately. Klapaucius^{Esteemed Constructor} 17:31, 29 January 2009 (EST)

I'm getting "The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems." alt 17:37, 29 January 2009 (EST)

I just got a "Connection to 65.60.9.250 Failed" page and then the above message when trying to access different pages. The server saga continues! Or did Anonymous set to work very quickly? Klapaucius^{Esteemed Constructor} 17:46, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Are we *sure* Andy's not willing to have a "server crash" in order to erase all signs of the hit list? --Phentari 18:01, 29 January 2009 (EST)

The "hit list" page was protected, and if they wanted to get rid of something they could just oversight it away. It's entirely plausible that Klapaucius made the right call - CP was recently warned to expect a DoS attack, after all. alt 18:07, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Nah. Someone just forgot to put fifty pee in the meter again. Andy's just popped out to the shops to get a Curly Wurly and some gobstoppers for change. DogP 18:08, 29 January 2009 (EST)

I get a "503 Service Temporarily Unavailable" ("The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems.") error at first, but now it loads again... though without the Conserv skin. And when I refreshed then, I got Firefox's built-in "Page Load Error: Failed to Connect" message. Trying again, I'm back at the 503 message. Yeah, I also fear that the DoS attack warning might have been real. *sigh* --Sid 18:12, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Maybe that Anonymous threat was real. 75.158.1.251 18:21, 29 January 2009 (EST)

It seems to be back up (for me at least). There is a slight gap in the Recent Changes, too:

• (Block log); 18:41 . . TK (Talk | contribs) blocked 24.47.176.0/21 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 year (account creation disabled) (Vandalism: Users - LiveAndLetLive, TonyA, KRover. IP#24.47.182.184 - Reported to Optium Online, West Babylon, NY)
• (diff) (hist) . . Talk:Barack Hussein Obama‎; 17:10 . . (+388) . . MauriceB (Talk | contribs) (→Is he or isn't he President?: )

I'll silently assume that they sorted out whatever has happened and simply go to bed now. If CP implodes again, I guess I'll read about it tomorrow :P --Sid 19:16, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Barney Fife

And he still hasn't caught it! --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 23:17, 29 January 2009 (EST)

I'm almost positive it was an intentional jab. If he does the same thing in an article rather than talk we'll have a case. DickTurpis 01:34, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Confirmed DickTurpis 01:50, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Wow, what a lame insult. That doesn't even make sense. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 04:58, 30 January 2009 (EST)

I love Frank (he's my rep too!) but I think it's a mildly funny insult if you didn't like him. dream^ing _{Hail Eris!} 07:16, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Aunt Bee for Secretary of Pies! Otis for ATF Director! Now we're talkin'! Jimaginator 09:04, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Yes, there's no question it was intentional. I posted it only to show how childish and amateurish the self-proclaimed "senior sysop" of the self-proclaimed "trustworthy encyclopedia" was. Hey Terry! If you write stuff like that, how do you expect people to take you seriously? I never expected him to fix it, because, as we know, talk pages on a wiki are an immutable historical transcript. They are never changed, other than for removal of libel. But, at 0145, 30 January, he edited it. Nice to know you still read us, Terry! Gauss 15:04, 30 January 2009 (EST)

This is, atleast, the second time there has been an WIGO about TK using Barney Fife as an insult for Barney Frank. He did it in a talk page in the midst of a conversation. It's a throwaway joke, that while not very funny, isn't especially noteworthy, either. I think there are dozens of better examples of his immaturity. Patrickr 15:29, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Speaking from the dead: CP to implement flaggedrevs

I'm technically R E T I R E D, but...

So I occasionally talk with Geo.Plrd on gchat. He's a nice dude, truth be told. Anyways, he asked me the other day if flaggedrevs would "basically kill vandalism." I told him yes, maybe: but it would, ultimately, prove that Conservapedia can't handle the outside world. Nevertheless, I personally think that means they're going full-throttle with it. Just sayin'-caius (hegemon) 01:13, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Points to consider with flagged revisions:

In order for it to work they will have to hide the revisions from everyone but sysops. This will create some interesting problems.

First, their "guard dog" will be worthless since it relies on recent changes to detect editing rate. The flagged revisions will not appear in recent changes so guard dog will not activate.

Next, no other users but sysops will see the edits, that means that it will be completely up to the sysops to deal with it, and they will have to be actively looking in the namespace that deals with flagged revisions.

Here comes the interesting point, a hyperactive vandal or a bot could will up that flagged revisions cue with thousands of edits before anyone is aware of it.

Extensions like "nuke" that remove all edits from a user will not function with flagged revisions.

That means sysops will have to manually remove thousands of "bot" revisions while sorting through any "real" revisions. I imagine that after 2-3 events such as this occurring we might see them rethink the approach.

Essentially what it would do is shut down half the tools they currently use for monitoring, blocking and cleaning up and give vandals the opportunity to waste substantial time of sysops.

This is just a few ideas off the top of my head that I can think of that would cause problems for them. There are several others that I won't bring up to avoid giving people "ideas." tmtoulouse 01:49, 30 January 2009 (EST)

With flagged revisions, do regular edits not appear in recent changes, or does the article just not immediately update itself when viewed through normal means? I thought it was he latter, but I don't know a whole lot about it. DickTurpis 01:52, 30 January 2009 (EST)

The extension is configurable to work in multiple ways, I would imagine CP would make it so flagged revisions could only be seen by sysops. If they did not then it would defeat the whole purpose since seeing them in recent changes won't alter the perception of vandalism at all. tmtoulouse 01:57, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Hell, they troll every edit by "non trusted" users there (as much, or even more, then I do here). So it won't be more work for them, really. It will make capturebot's job harder - potentially even impossible. Of course, they will bork it on the first iteration, and second, and third. But if it makes Andrew happy (not having to argue with "liberals"), it will probably fly. Eh, we could move faster and more fluently than them, but really: who cares about wandalism on CP? The big funny is the asininity of what the sysops and trusted editors post. If they actually succeed in eliminating "wandals", Poe can take a holiday, and we can relax and just track the genuine idiocy there. ħuman 02:20, 30 January 2009 (EST)

We rarely really care about vandalism, and capture bot is used mostly to capture insanity from the sysops anyway. As I detailed above though flagged revision will make their job harder by hiding a vandal behind the scenes. If a sysops is not actively watching the review cue a bot could fill it up very quickly. Then what? Several thousand revisions in waiting is a lot for half a dozen people to sort through. tmtoulouse 02:22, 30 January 2009 (EST)

True that. If someone gives a shit enough to write such a bot, of course. Maybe that Sideways guy? ħuman 02:39, 30 January 2009 (EST)

I can't help but think that this would be the end of discussion on non-user talk pages. Corry^{Wow. We're just blowing through nap time, aren't we?} 03:12, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Would flaggedrevs apply to talk as well as article space, or do you mean changes would occur to slowly to allow for any meaningful discussion?

It also means that anything that is visible on CP would have the stamp of approval of Andy. They couldn't claim the contents of an article it was vandalism if every thing has to be approved by one of his sysops. Every article becomes "this is what conservapedia believes and has approved of" --Shagie 03:13, 30 January 2009 (EST)

I just say: "Cupertino Effect". No tool can ever "kill" vandalism, just like no tool can ever "kill" typos. No tool will ever be a brain replacement.

Sure, it will help filter out those "GET STUFFED! GET STUFFED! GET STUFFED! ANDY AND GERBILS!" wandals, but beyond that, it simply means that sysops will have to do a lot of work, even without anybody DoS-ing the system with a bot. If they feel like running a simulation, ask the sysops to go through every single edit of a normal day and to either mark it as patrolled or to revert it. Good luck. The core sysops can't even be arsed to take care of move/delete requests, so what makes anybody think that they will sacrifice a few hours extra every day to double-check every edit? Sure, it will work for a day or so as everybody tries out the new toy, but in a week? A month? No.

All this will do (like Shagie said) is to give parodists and subtle vandals the Sysop Seal Of Approval )while potentially valid edits will get backlogged like whoa). There will be no more "Oh, this list was created by Internet Terrorists, and we never knew about it!" excuses because some sysop will have to explicitly say "I approve of this article."

So... I totally approve of this. Really, nothing will prove CP's helplessness more than installing this extension. --Sid 03:54, 30 January 2009 (EST)

I agree, it'll stop obvious vandals but it won't stop the real problems such as the senior editor's paranoia or the fact that Andy will accept anything so long as their's enough brown-nosing involved. Parodists wanting to make CP even more insane and showing up Schlafly and the other sysops as the bigotted twats that they are will still get their way. You can't write an extension or a bot that will solve that issue, only a brain transplant on behalf of Schlafly will help there. ArmondikoV^sshole 10:01, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Blago

Watching CP try to react to Blago is like watching a two-headed dog chasing his tail. On one hand, he's a Democrat, so he's obviously evil personified, but on the other hand it was Democrats who removed him from office, so obviously it was a fascist power-grab on their part. Everybody's evil, except of course the Republicans who voted to impeach and convict him, they're okay. I also like the way in TK's world you cannot impeach someone until they have been convicted of a crime. Somehow it didn't work that way for Clinton. Perhaps we should wait a year for a criminal conviction before removing someone from office. That'll work well. DickTurpis 01:46, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Or you could do what the Republicans did, wait for a governor to be convicted of a crime and then not impeach him. Bob Taft is part of the reason Ohio is controlled by Democrats today. Hactar 13:42, 30 January 2009 (EST)

I must admit that I don't know precisely how it works in the US, but isn't it the purpose of impeachment to decide whether charges should be brought against the official in the first place? An indictment, as it were? LadyLuck 13:58, 30 January 2009 (EST)

In the US, we have a similar system for handling both those things that can send you to prison and those things that can remove you from office—an "indictment"/"impeachment", and a "trial". (Many Americans are confused about the fact that impeachment is just the equivalent of indictment, that is, it is a formal accusation; that's all. Clinton was impeached and then acquitted at trial.) These two-step processes are essentially independent for criminal cases and removal-from-office cases. The impeachment doesn't bring criminal charges; it brings removal-from-office charges. The notion that you can't be impeached/removed unless a criminal indictment or conviction has occurred is a figment of Blago's and TK's imaginations. (And some of Nixon's supporters before that.) The question of whether conviction from impeachment (leading to removal from office) and conviction at criminal trial (leading to prison) constitutes double jeopardy in our criminal system is less than clear. Blago may well claim at his criminal trial that he can't be criminally punished for the crimes for which he was removed from office. He is not likely to prevail. Gauss 15:16, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Schlafly math redux

Regarding the main page right edits and crazy numbers... didn't we just cover this, like earlier today? Please try to avoid repetitive WIGOs, people. Or did Andy repeat his stupidity? ħuman 02:34, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Or did it just get rewritten? ħuman 02:35, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Andy and British spelling

I wonder if Andy has ever exchanged correspondence with conservative icon Margaret "Iron Balls" Thatcher? She is titled The Right Honourable The Baroness Margaret Thatcher, so if she uses her title on her stationary, would he assume she's a dirty stinkin' libb-burr-ull? (Actually when she was an MP, she voted to decriminalize male homosexuality and legalize abortion, so he probably loathe her on those alone.) MDB 08:19, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Even good ol' Maggie isn't Conservative enough for The Schlaf. ArmondikoV^sshole 08:24, 30 January 2009 (EST)

(EC) Thatcher was discussed sometime recently (I don't remember in what context) & Schlafly said something along the lines of her being relatively conservative (for a dang limey!), but still less than completely conservative for supporting gun control, abortion, homosexual agenda, etc. Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 08:26, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Yeh I remember that too. I think it was in the gun control discussion. There we go. --GTac 09:10, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Also she was a scientist before going into politics, and was one of the first world leaders to speak out about global warming (because she understood the research). Dang, them libruls are evrywhere! Yours truly^{Dear Sir} 09:22, 30 January 2009 (EST)

I see the confusion. Andy doesn't acknowledge the existence of anything outside of America. As a result, Conservatives are all about the gun control and homosexuality, issues that just aren't real issues in the UK. ArmondikoV^sshole 09:54, 30 January 2009 (EST)

It also may have to do with the British Conservative Party's faction of "liberal conservatism" which involves a conservative free market, as well as a socially liberal view on areas like gay marriage and abortion. So it seems to be more of a confusion over the archaic left-right, liberal vs conservative axis that Americans are so fixated on. ~Ttony21^{(talk, contribs)} 11:29, 30 January 2009 (EST)

The Trustworthy Encyclopedia...

... isn't very trustworthy, at least in terms of server up-time at the moment. It's down yet again. How have they managed to bork it so thoroughly? It must take someone really "special" to run one of the least reliable websites ont' interweb. Bondurant 11:17, 30 January 2009 (EST)

I'd still love to know (IT ignoramus that I am) just how they managed to convert every URL that has an é,ô,í character in it into complete gibberish. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:26, 30 January 2009 (EST)

hhhhmmmm.... it would depend on which database they use, but I know some databases I've worked with require the administrator to say "use character set X". If they futzed up during the upgrade, they could have switched from a character set that allows things like accented characters to one that does not, and the new database is displaying them as best it can. Note that doesn't necessarily indicate complete stupidity on the part of whoever did the upgrade (thought they probably should have been paying better attention) -- it could also be bad programming on the part of the database designer, things like it detaults to a character set rather than using whatever the previous one was. MDB 11:34, 30 January 2009 (EST)

It's not really an encyclopedia, according to TK it's: "A resource that can be used by people all over the world to better understand American, conservative, Christian and family-friendly values". Well, I guess that's kind of true.. --GTac 14:07, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Except that he says "Conservapedia is an American, conservative and Christian-friendly encyclopedia" in the previous sentence... Sorry, GTac, even though we all agree that CP isn't really an encyclopedia. Bondurant 14:55, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Sorry, I wasn't trying to imply that he said it's not an encyclopedia, I just find it amusing that it can be used by the world to better understand American conservatives. --GTac 15:09, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Better than football

Isn't it fun watching parodists wreak havoc, only for them to be welcomed by TK? I've got my eye on one right now, I don't know who it is but I wish him Godspeed... HWessel 11:50, 30 January 2009 (EST)

By the way, I love the way the fly rapes references to make it look like there's any basis to what he's saying. His favourite technique seems to be the "Schlafly Double", e.g. "Barack Obama, president of the USA, is a muslim [ref linking to a page saying that B.O. is president]". HWessel 11:55, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Almost as good is when he links to CP as a source, especially when the source is an "essay" or "Mystery". DickTurpis 12:11, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Oooooh, I'll have to look out for one of those. How ironic it is that Andy has given birth to a pastime so very similar to paleontology... HWessel 12:20, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Could you point me to one? I haven't seen one of those before. EternalCritic 14:01, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Point you to one of the cases where Andy links to his own Mystery articles as a reference? Ha! Why limit yourself to one? --Sid 15:21, 30 January 2009 (EST)

And even these aren't as good as the famous reference "This actually happened" (note 1 in this page). Klapaucius^{Esteemed Constructor} 15:26, 30 January 2009 (EST)

*laughs* I totally forgot about that one! But that reminds me of a certain dinner conversation! --Sid 15:30, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Interestingly, I just read the talk page of the "Was St. John a Child" mystery, and in the first paragraph here Andy makes an argument that could be very effectively used against YEC (failing trying to use reason). Corry^{Wow. We're just blowing through nap time, aren't we?} 16:07, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Economic Stimulus Bill

Part Conservapedia, part right-wing in general, but I think this article, and asociated "non-essential" list goes a long way towards showing the right-wing's problems. Look at some of the items they consider non-essential; 32 billion for improving the energy grid, 30 billion on infrastructure spending, 54 billion for job traing, and so on. They don't get it; tax cuts are a short term answer at best. In order to stimulate the economy, you must create jobs; building a road is a much better way to put a guy to work than giving a billionaire more money, then hoping he hires someone. It's so frustrating when congressional republicans just don't get it, then hold up a bill that will help our country. If anything, the bill should have more spending, and less tax cuts. Z3ro^talk 15:32, 30 January 2009 (EST)

On Planet Conservapedia, giving money to poor people is an offense to the Natural Order--if God had wanted those filthy proles to have any money, He'd've given it to them Himself! (I wish I thought I was joking here.) --Gulik 17:34, 30 January 2009 (EST)